Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 08:01:44 -0700 (PDT) From: "Nico Haupt" View Contact Details View Contact Details Subject: Re: The truth and reality the lothsome "no-planers" deny. To: "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, webfairy@thewebfairy.com, jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu S., forgot to hit spell check? anyway, what your own "career" depends, it has the denial button all over your face. When this list here was established, i "invited" you to analyse my video findings from the TV footage. You never did. We established that you used "video evidence" as well in the past, but this time the TV broadcast seems not to exist for you. On Sep23, 2005 you wrote: "I have watched the videos of WTC 7's collapse.." http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/04/1691636_comment.php When will you finally wrote that you also watched the videos with some alleged commercial aircrafts in it? Meanwhile the therapy didn't even start for you yet: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 F "S. King" wrote: Your caeer is over, Nico. Seek help. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "Nico Haupt" , "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, webfairy@thewebfairy.com, jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: Re: The truth and reality the lothsome "no-planers" deny. Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 04:57:16 -0700 (PDT) "..."S. King" scaped again from the list and wrote: Your long careers of denial are over. The Moussaoui case put the final nails in the coffins of your fantasies yesterday. All that is left for the three of you to do is admit it and publicly apologize to the families of all the victims you three insulted these since 9/11. That is, if you have even a speck of decency and integrity left...." The only "final nail" which is 'put', is in Skydwarfs nail to ruin his last brain cell. I don't know why Skydwarf always confuses Shanksville with New York, but that must be indeed the 'fantasy' he's talking about. :) More fantasy planes and fantasy science. All you need to know about yet another distraction of sky's last cells are here: http://team8plus.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?2677 Nothing changed. Skydwarf wil not address TV footage and he doesn't know, where New York City is, seems to confuse it for days now with Pennsylvannia. That must be where he was hired as a cyber troll committee member. Maybe he should finally move over there and don't waste our time. Nico Haupt wrote: S. weeks are passing by and you're still not responding to any of my findings within the video footage. Your script says, just ignore it. Fine. Meanwhile we also have established that you confirmed that you don't care about the contradictory (or non existance) of some alleged witnesses. Fine. http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ 6. What about all these witnesses? Your only obsessive distraction script is therefore only built on your alleged "physical evidence". But i have to remind you over and over again, that there is none: 12. What about the forensic evidence? ...As a matter of fact, the physical evidence speaks clearly AGAINST commercial aircraft and points out too many violations of scientific laws. The counter physical 'evidence' is therefore "pseudo forensic science" and the real "junk science". Basically one does not need any physical evidence to prove that the footage allegedly containing aircraft has been 'faked'. The only "physical evidence" we're able to debate here is the existance of the contradictory and fakery within TV footage, still ignored and not addressed by you as also the existance of your shrinkling brain cells, aslo still ignored and not addressed by you - :) Therefore still a free therapy for you: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ "S. King" wrote: Nico, you must enjoy showing off your stupidity. "I have to inform you, that on 800 pages of the recent released 911emergency call transcripts, NOONE reported, that they saw with their own eyes ANY incoming commercial aircraft hitting the South Tower." LOL, Nico. So what? Another poor evasion, Nico. Everyone knows that Flight 93 crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, AA 77 into the Pentagon, AA11 into WTC 1, UA 175 into WTC 2, and you into the trashbin of history. The physical evidence has always refuted your pathetic nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, webfairy@thewebfairy.com, jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: Re: The truth and reality the lothsome "no-planers" deny. Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:50:40 -0700 (PDT) S. once again your distraction show shows what kind of clown you are :) I have to inform you, that on 800 pages of the recent released 911emergency call transcripts, NOONE reported, that they saw with their own eyes ANY incoming commercial aircraft hitting the South Tower. You will find the link at your free therapy at: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ 6. What about all these witnesses? Since the building itself was logically the closest spot to the building than any alleged aircraft phone calls you can trashcan your fairytailes. Once again i'm also not speaking for Gerard, but as far as i know, he's never sweating. The only one full of sweat, blood and water is our baby darling S., who's desperately cutting and pasting old drivel from his cybertroll database :) Your drivel makes me sleepy. I will check your nonsense tomorrow again :) Best wishes from my family, who's here since 1900. They think, your daisy committee are traitors too and should join the exodus pretty soon before you get leathered and punished by 'the people' -:) Your sick career as a 9/11 government asset is finished. "S. King" wrote: A very poor evasion, Nico. Everyone knows that Flight 93 crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, AA 77 into the Pentagon, AA11 into WTC 1, UA 175 into WTC 2, and you into the trashbin of history. This isn't rocket science except to you "no-plane" idiots. And Gerard is sweating big-time from the testimony today in the Moussaoui case while you desperately evade the truth: "Thirteen more Sept. 11 victims and family members strode to the witness stand Tuesday as jurors endured a third day of graphic evidence of the horrors and haunting impact of the nation's worst terror attack. "While the material was supposedly toned down in response to defense lawyers' complaints, it included videos of American Airlines Flight 77 hitting the building at 530 miles per hour and photos of charred bodies - one on a stretcher and another sitting upright in an office - of some of the 64 airline passengers and crew and 125 Pentagon workers who died that day. "Moussaoui, who was found eligible for the death penalty last week, seemed unfazed. He smiled as an FBI agent summarized the damage to the military's headquarters, and during a recess shouted: "Burn all Pentagon next time!" "Prosecutors also played air traffic control tapes in which a pilot of United Flight 93 shouted "Mayday! Mayday! Get out of here!" moments before his apparent stabbing death as hijackers seized the cockpit." http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=MOUSSAOUI-04-11-06&cat=WW Better pack you bags and head back to the Fatherland, Nico. Your sick career as a 9/11 Denier is finished. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, webfairy@thewebfairy.com, jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: Re: The truth and reality the lothsome "no-planers" deny. Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:24:01 -0700 (PDT) S.wrote: "...When the transcripts of communications from Flight 93 are released..." He's also confusing "f93" with the alleged NY flights. That makes S. still a therapy candidate, who still ignores the TV footage fakery from W-ABC. I have some good news for you, Skydwarf. This therapy here is free. You should appreciate and use it before your braincells are shrinking to zero and confusing more official flight numbers. I give you a hint. Start with "UA175". The flight, which never arrived in NYC :) http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ NEW 04/01 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html NEW 03/30Camera for only live footage identified as military system --- "S. King" wrote: > I just continue to show you haven't a clue about > what you are talking > about and how easy it is to contiually debunk you, > Nico. > > When the transcripts of communications from Flight > 93 are released for > the first time today or tomorrow, we can be sure > that you will have > another prepared, contrary-to-fact > statement about them. > > That will give us another good laugh, Nico. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nico Haupt" > To: "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, > webfairy@thewebfairy.com, > jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, > jfetzer@d.umn.edu > Subject: Re: The truth and reality the lothsome > "no-planers" deny. > Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 06:29:02 -0700 (PDT) > > S., > > you had your distraction chapter. > We know that your brain cells are also at low > altitude -:) > > Now back to the visuals: > > http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html > > > > WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ > =================================== > > By Nico Haupt > April 7, 2006 > [IMAGE] > and then start from scratch again: > > > NEW 04/01 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world > > http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html > > NEW 03/30Camera for only live footage identified > as military system > > http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html > > "S. King" wrote: > > I knew you would make an ass of yourself, Nico: > "It was > impossible during 2001 that these cell calls > could have been > placed from high altitudes," you say. > We all know that the towers were at low > altitude. And so was this > phone call which you were not even aware of:"Mr. > Hanson said his > son softly said, "Oh my God, oh my God, oh my > God." Mr. Hanson > said he thought he heard someone screaming in > the background, > then looked at the television and saw the second > plane hit the > World Trade Center." So much for your insane > fantasies, Nico. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nico Haupt" > To: "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, > webfairy@thewebfairy.com, > jwalter@reopen911.org, > steven_jones@byu.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu > Subject: Re: The truth and reality the > lothsome "no-planers" > deny. > Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:15:34 -0700 (PDT) > > Do we hear a whisper from Skydwarf again? > > He desperately refers to yet another old > school distraction > chapter, > his government scriptwriters wrote now already > years ago. > > 5. What about the cell phone talks? > > http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html > > They should fire you in your daisy committee, > replace you and > write better scripts.You're getting boring > again -:) > > Even the Rendon Group wrote better scripts in > their early > days. > > Maybe you have luck and they will hire you for > a doorman at > Camp X Ray, > bwahahaha :) > > Sorry to pop your balloon. > Increasingly, it's becoming evident > that Cyber Troll Emperor S. Dwarf wears no > clothes. > > Poor S. -:) > It seems like Skydwarf is really ready for > therapy at > > > http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html > > > > WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ > =================================== > > By Nico Haupt > April 7, 2006 > [IMAGE] > and then start from scratch again: > > > NEW 04/01 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world > > http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html > > NEW 03/30Camera for only live footage > identified as military > system > > http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html > > > > "S. King" wrote: > > Let's remind the inhumane Haupt, Garble, and > Holmgren of > the truth and reality they deny so > vehemently from > today's testimony in the Moussaoui penalty > case:-----The > jury heard from a man who told of talking by > phone to his > son, who was on a hijacked plane and thought > it was going > to be crashed into a building. "Don't worry, > Dad; if it > happens, it'll be quick," C. Lee Hanson, 73, > of > Connecticut quoted his son, Pete, as saying. > Mr. Hanson > said his son telephoned him from United > Airlines Flight > 175, which was hijacked while flying from > Boston to Los > Angeles. His son was on the flight with his > wife and > 2-year-old daughter. Mr. Hanson said his son > thought a > flight attendant had been killed and that > the flight had > become very bumpy and people were throwing > up. Mr. Hanson > said his son softly said, "Oh my God, oh my > God, oh my > God." Mr. Hanson said he thought he heard > someone > screaming in the background, then looked at > the > television and saw the second plane hit the > World Trade > Center. After he gave authorities combs and > toothbrushes > to provide DNA samples, Mr. Hanson said, he > was given a > sliver of bone of his son. "It's all I had > of my > beautiful redheaded son," Mr. Hanson said. > The Associated > Press contributed to this report.----No > doubt, the > lothsome trio will continue to deny the > truth. > Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:09:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "Nico Haupt" To: "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, webfairy@thewebfairy.com, jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu We note for the record that S.King, together with his script writers, refuses once again to deal with the visual broadcast evidence. http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html "S. King" wrote: We note for the record that Nico Haupt, like Rosalee Grable and Gerard Holmgren, refuses once again to deal with the physical evidence. It's the nature of the beast. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "S. King" , holmgren@iinet.net.au, webfairy@thewebfairy.com, jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: Re: 04/07: WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 07:33:39 -0700 (PDT) Note that S., when confronted with the requirement to address my visual findings, has been unbable to respond. S. instead tried again and again to distract with some pseudo physical stuff. I covered this endless times and it's also mentioned here: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html S. is inable to confront the issue or develop a script, which is able to do so. I recommend that 'he' should read this again and learn something: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html Adding to that is the inability of his other government handlers of his daisy committee to do so either. "S. King" wrote: Note how Rosalee Grable, when confronted with the requirement to prove her assertions, has been unable to back up her claims of the last two days, the entire underpinnings of her video nonsense. Adding to that is the inability of Haupt and Holmgren to do so either. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "titus@Mendofornia Town Action Group" , "Michael Morrissey" , skylax@comcast.net, plaguepuppy@comcast.net, HQ2600@aol.com, curtisr@seattleu.edu, editor@thetruthseeker.co.uk, cookb@ulv.edu, MARCUS.FORD@NAU.EDU, malaprop2@msn.com, mitchelcohen@mindspring.com, email@unmask.dk, email@hbuecker.net, wahinkpe@yahoo.com, psychhst@tiac.net, aauaplanes09112001whathappened@yahoo.co.uk, holmgren@iinet.net.au, mcginn@ohio.edu, missilegate@yahoogroups.com, rmerrill@mica.edu, mkeefer@look.ca, webfairy@thewebfairy.com, GABBARDD@ECU.EDU, jeff_farrer@byu.edu, wwwatcher2001@yahoo.com, jiri.kudelka@villusion.cz, Press@tvnewslies.org, jwalter@reopen911.org, kenvan@comcast.net, lynnlandes@earthlink.net, webstertarpley@yahoo.com, steven_jones@byu.edu, ADuncan282@aol.com, kevin@mujca.com, ajohnson@cs.uic.edu, chossudovsky@videotron.ca, mkeefer@uoguelph.ca, hcianci@txcc.commnet.edu, judy.wood@ces.clemson.edu, jfetzer@d.umn.edu, wingedpiper@yahoo.com, "Morgan Reynolds" , skyking@scientist.com, rayantoky@aol.com, Mruppert@copvcia.com, dylan@loosechange911.com, janicematthews@sbcglobal.net, babelmagazine@adelphia.net, sisyphus1285@cs.com, phillipjayhan@yahoo.com, mark@cosmicpenguin.com Subject: 04/07: WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 20:55:39 -0700 (PDT) http://www.911closeup.com/nico/FAQ_planehuggers.html WTC Planehugger Therapy -Top 30 FAQ (incl. "9/11 NY Aircraft 'Witnesses'" (04/07/06) at http://911closeup.com/nico/witness_contradictions.html ) By Nico Haupt April 7, 2006 Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 11:01:45 -0700 (PDT) From: "Nico Haupt" View Contact Details View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert Subject: Re: 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world To: "S. King" , "Nico Haupt" , "Rosalee Grable" CC: nicohaupt2@yahoo.com, jfetzer@d.umn.edu, nicohaupt@gmx.li, jwalter@reopen911.org, steven_jones@byu.edu, judy.wood@ces.clemson.edu, Send an Instant Message webstertarpley@yahoo.com S. tries to escape from addressing my stuff and pretends he did. He is in company of other government shills, -assets or -truthling puppets. away from desk until 6 PM EST, until then everyone should read: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world By Nico Haupt April 1, 2006 From: "S. King" To: "Nico Haupt" Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 13:01:21 -0500 Subject: Re: 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world You'v never addressed the facts which refute you as you well know, Nico. You cannot continue to pretend otherwise. As we can all now see, you are as ethically-challenged as the debunked Grable and Holmgren. You're in good company. S. King Nico Haupt wrote: S., you don't read. I addressed everything what you need to know here: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world By Nico Haupt April 1, 2006 nico aka ewing2001 (co-founder of "9/11 Science and Justice Alliance" (2002-2006), together with Jeff "Plaguepuppy" King, see also King/Haupt on Webster Tarpley radioshow, links at http://www.911closeup.com/nico) "S. King" wrote: As you well know, Nico, I have already dealt with your fantasies, and you refused to refute all the physical evidence that refutes your fairy tales. You also know that Holmgren was refuted repeatedly easily by me as well as the Webfairy, the poor woman who's never had any instruction in ethical behavior. So, once again, you are on record as refusing to address the physical evidence which refutes you. S. King ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "S. King" , "Nico Haupt" , "Rosalee Grable" Subject: Re: 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 08:47:09 -0700 (PDT) S., Nothing has changed from your side too. You still refuse to deal with the tv-visual evidence. You guys running out of scripts? http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world By Nico Haupt April 1, 2006 "S. King" wrote: So Nico, nothing has changed. Grable, Holmgren, and you still refuse to deal with the physical evidence. What else is new? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "Nico Haupt" , "S. King" , "Rosalee Grable" Subject: 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 14:13:45 -0800 (PST) 9/11: 16 CGIs which fooled the world By Nico Haupt April 1, 2006 http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGI/CGI_aprilfools.html Nico Haupt wrote: The "planehuggers" crew still believe, they can refuse to deal with the visual (and investigative evidence) that AA 11 and UA 175, both scheduled Boeing 767s, did not crash into WTC 1 and 2. Not to speak of conflicting eyewitness reports and misplanted debris. Since Moussaoui wasn't confronted with the visible appearance of KSM and Ramsi Binalshibh yet, this is yet another attempt from government shill S. King, to escape from the video analysis and the latest updates and findings: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html I hope, that Skyking is buying a domain to open an own website and reveal the names of his other members of his daisy committee :) PS: Thanks for removing Rob and presenting us the real current players in this 'truthling' movement. I'm sure everyone here enjoys it, to have some GovAssets so close. I guess, you also did good with removing WING TV. They're not playing any significance anymore either. "S. King" wrote: The "no planes, no planes" trio of Grable, Holmgren, and Haupt still believe they can refuse to deal with the physical evidence that AA 11 and UA 175, both scheduled Boeing 767s, crashed into WTC 1 and 2. Not to speak of the hundreds of independent, disparate, and disconnected eyewitnesses seeing both crashes and the airline debris on the streets below. Since Moussaoui has put the final nail into their "no plane" coffin, and before they each fade into the trashbin of history, the best that Rosalee, Nico, and Gerard can hope to do is sell their domain names on eBay. A suggested opening bid is $1.00 each. I feel very sorry for you three. S. King Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 08:19:56 -0800 (PST) From: "Nico Haupt" View Contact Details View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert Subject: Re: Plane Hugging Party has no popcorn anymore :) To: "S. King" , robertrice2@sympatico.ca, jfetzer@d.umn.edu, leland@33o.com, dylan@loosechange911.com, janicematthews@sbcglobal.net, babelmagazine@adelphia.net, sisyphus1285@cs.com, nicohaupt@gmx.li CC: "'Rosalee Grable'" Nico wrote: One doesn't need ANY physical evidence to know that WTC 1 & 2 were not hit by Boeing 767s. Which leaves you where you've always been, Skyking: in la-la land, twisting in the wind like a convoluted pretzel. I really hate to keep ruining your day, Skyking. http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html "S. King" wrote: Nico, I am STILL waiting for you to refute the physical evidence of the crashes of UA 175 and AA 11, both Boeing 767s. It's time to stop playing with video equipment and get down to the physical facts. Gerard Holmgren bombed on that, Rosalee avoids dealing with physical evidence entirely, and I'm still waiting for you to step up to the plate. Get to work, Nico! S. King ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nico Haupt" To: "Nico Haupt" , robertrice2@sympatico.ca, jfetzer@d.umn.edu, skyking@scientist.com, leland@33o.com, dylan@loosechange911.com, janicematthews@sbcglobal.net, babelmagazine@adelphia.net, sisyphus1285@cs.com, nicohaupt@gmx.li Subject: Plane Hugging Party has no popcorn anymore :) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 19:50:56 -0800 (PST) Alex Jones wrote: "Thank you for all you do to help us fight the New World Order." Thanks everyone for having me on a ghost party, where everyone else is running out of words... :) This party is now slowly over and back in the hand of Rob "globalmanagement" Rice, Mike "truthling grandfather" Ruppert and Jim "Pod" Fetzer. The findings at http://www.911closeup.com/nico are declared as non challenged. Thanks everyone for the confirmation, that i apparently did my homework. It's no "avantgarde" at all, it's just watching TV.... :) my respect goes to Charlie Sheen, who unfortunately had no time for us yet. The first Hollywood Star who declared on national TV, that no commercial aircraft hit the Twin Towers, while all other 9/11 truthlings decided to keep up with lies :) http://www.defamer.com/hollywood/charlie-sheen/charlie-sheen-talks-911-conspiracy-161961.php "...There was a feeling, it just didn't look any commercial jetliner I've flown on any time in my life..." http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/3/emw362500.htm&cid=1105351482 "....I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where it disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous fireball." From: "Gerard Holmgren" Fri, 31 Mar 2006 13:07:46 +1000 Subject: Spook Rupert's fit of pique. Heh ! Ruppert has even admitted that he routinely lies in order to try to be mainstream. And even with routine lying, he still can't manage it. So no wonder he froths at the mouth if anyone else gets any publicity. Since Mike "steel melts at 800 deg -Vreeland" Ruppert can barely boast about his "research" skills (snigger) his one hope for glory is to puff himself up and try to get some publicity. Which is why he takes on the appearance of a very angry puffer fish if any else manages to achieve what he's incapable of. Hey Mike - have you worked out what temperature steel melts at yet ? Maybe its in a secret memo, referred to in a hurriedly scrawled note by Vreeland from his jail cell. (Snigger). -----Original Message----- From: Rosalee Grable [mailto:webfairy@thewebfairy.com] Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 12:52 PM To: Nico Haupt Subject: Re: Plane Hugging Party updates: '2nd hit'- camera identified as "military cam sys" Aron Russo's "From Freedom to Fascism" is a great work, and a Picture about factual information that would have been dismissed as "Conspiracy Theory" is a brave thing. http://freedomtofascism.com Unfortunately Ruppert has all the best lines. It' s kinda ookie how Ruppert is right there at the foundation point of any new movement. He's already humping his "Peak OIL" as the fault of the Federal Resesrve. Nico Haupt wrote: > Heya, it was actually important to add Mike "Spook" Ruppert into this list. He's still too lazy to respond, but monitoring us carefully. Here is his latest embarrasment, how he's backstabbing everyone of us, including Charlie Sheen. Well done, Mike. The 9/11 truthlings are still too impressed with you, as to realize how shady you are :) That means, you can manipulate them like puppets you did from the beginning That means, you are really the grandfather of this 'movement", the grandfather of the 9/11-"truthling" movement :) http://fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/033006_charlie_sheen.shtml HEY CHARLIE SHEEN, WAKE UP! There Are Good Reasons Why 9/11 is Having Its 15 Minutes of Fame Now – Look at Who’s In the Spotlight by Michael C. Ruppert © Copyright 2006, From The Wilderness Publications, www.fromthewilderness.com. Nico Haupt wrote: Rob wrote: "... Who the hell knows where you people are coming from. I think your just ego driven attention seekers wanting to get your name associated with the latest "theory", and to heck with it if it ends up discrediting the truth movement or infects groups like the 9/11 Scholars. I don't like you Nico, nor the no planers. You people are nuts. Please just stop emailing me your nonsense entirely. I don't want to debate this, this absurdity...." Rob, good for you. Was that an example for me to control my own anger management? :) You are one of the wimps who are lying their shit out through out their whole life. They're pretending they're pro nature, while they're not. They're eating bio food, while it's not. They're pretending they love their boss, while they suck up to him They're pretending they love their loved ones, while the're cheating on them. They're also the same who believe every kind of crap on TV but they're still dumb enough to write chain letters against Rush Limbaugh. This isn't a shill. Rob isn't really a shill at all.. He's just a party pooper and no luck for therapy :) This is a classic example of one of the dumbest gatekeepers i met in 4 years. It's not even a planehugger. It must be a brother of Jonathan Gold, who is obsessed to be a volunteer of moving some pile of cyber shits and cyber farts away. I don't care if you like me. I'm glad, that you hate me :) That just proves how much cells you lost in all the last years. Your anger about oppressing the truth has therefore to be directed to someone you can't touch. A typical poor example of selfish ignorance.. Not sure, how much fakery in your life will break apart, but i'm sure YOU know why you hang out in cyberspace for so long :) That you don't need to look into the mirror and seeing all the lies tatooed on your face :) This is one of them: http://globalmanagement.ca/ourcompany.asp "..Executive Search firm (often better known as a “Headhunting” company) comprised of the best and brightest people from various occupational backgrounds..." I don't know what that means. Did they hire you as a doorman for this company? For every point i'm making here and you ignore, you will receive 3 personal insults. Is that a fair deal, dumbass? Look what Rob's company also is about: "...Given our unique position, we are also able to provide our client with crucial information regarding our candidate’s motivations, concerns, and expectations that might be more difficult to determine in a typical interview between an employer and a prospective employee. ..." Well, Rob, i have also some "motivations, concerns, and expectations" but you haven't been able to address them so far. Maybe you could start doing this, in case you're not working as a doorman over there. Or was that the reason, to block your email over there? That they don't figure out, that the doorman is cyberchatting? Or maybe they will figure out, that you work AGAINST their principle, which means, to address "motivations, concerns, and expectations" Maybe they should really fire you over this, because that's what you can't at all. If you really "work" for them, you just violated their company etiquette: "...we conduct each search from the ground up, casting a tight net strategically around the search universe, and then, by systematically identifying and approaching each and every prospective candidate within it, almost no stone will be left unturned in our pursuit of the very best people who are “out there..” Wow, which stone did you just recently "unturn"? You figured out that i photoshopped a plane out of a photo. Wow, do i get a job at your company now or do i have to pay you for this detective conclusion. However, in Rob's "globalmanagement" the fakery world only happens after the fact, not during 9/11, just some minutes later or 4.6 years later in his shrinking cyber brain and obscure cyber party lists, where he has to jerk off his ego, LOL.... Nico Haupt wrote: Rob wrote: "... #2087 is a still photograph by a man named Aaorn C. Traub # 2087 @ http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?categoryID=3 (Install Viewpoint - quick and easy - to Magnify X10)..." cool. Then we have 3 contradictive sources. Traub, Forman and Nathaniel :) But all three screenshotted from the CNN amateur camera clip Here Rob actually found a lost braincell in his head: "...That is intentionally misleading Nico http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?CategoryID=-1&picnum=4093 You've either located another image taken from the same camera and angle, or have actually worked to photoshop the plane out of the picture..." Wow, Rob you got it :) So you think, if i'm able to photoshop this, other's can't? It took me 10 seconds to get it out, it takes possibly -pre-produced- 10 seconds to get it in. Yes, http://tinyurl.com/zb8js was photoshopped. Bingo. Now we know, that Rob is that dumb and fell into a trap, that he can't be a shill. And he won't be hired by skyking@.. either :) Intentionally misleading? Isn't that what you're doing here by ignoring the facts? And did you finally figure out, that i removed here planes here, too? : http://www.911closeup.com/nico What goes up, must go down. Your braincells are lighter than a feather... Don't sell or send us fakery, then i don't need to unfake it...... :) Nico Haupt wrote: Hey Rob, there must be a mistake on your side. Photo #6588 has no plane in it, as seen here: http://tinyurl.com/zb8js Maybe you can provide us with the name of the original photo camera man to explain this problem ? :) Possibly someone uploaded the wrong "photo" at hereisnewyork, LOL You have more cells recovered? Bring them on, please :) Nico Haupt wrote: (replaced Rob's old address with robertrice2@sympatico.ca ) Rob, thanks for correcting your email. The "photos" you sent me, are no photos, but screenshots. Photo No.1 (# 2087) comes from the unidentified CNN amateur camera clip, which wasn't shown between 8:45 AM and 10:45 AM on CNN, as proven with original footage, parked at 911chronology.com This "photo" was later falsely linked to two opposite sources, Park Forman (who apparently did an online slideshow for NY TIMES, based on the CNN footage), but also Naka Natheniel, who is the multimedia partner of Nicholas D. Kristof. http://www.bebeyond.com/LearnEnglish/DailyReadings/Opinions/Crash.htm I give this contradiction the benefit of doubt and could imagine, that Natheniel and Foreman worked together on this slideshow. In one source Forman is linked to Brooklyn, though this shot must have been filmed from the westside, associated with the NJ side, but maybe still within Manhattan. I saw #6588 before also. This incoming flight path contradicts with all other 'photos' and logically must have been photoshopped. The source is unknown as far as i know. see also South Tower attack: Aircraft "Video" Contradictions http://www.911closeup.com/nico/contradictions1.html regards, nico aka ewing2001 Rob Rice wrote: Either do not include me, or use this address robertrice2@sympatico.ca Thank you. I could send you two photographs right now of the plane which show that what you are proposing is nonsensicle in absolute terms. Right Side Here Is New York Gallary Image (still photo) # 2087 @ http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?categoryID=3 (Install Viewpoint - quick and easy - to Magnify X10) Left side # 6588 http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?CategoryID=-1&picnum=4093 (Install Viewpoint - quick and easy - to Magnify X10) Now please, do not send any more emails to robrice@globalmanagement.ca and if you MUST, use robertrice2@sympatico.ca Thank you. From: Nico Haupt [mailto:nicohaupt2@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 2:33 PM To: robrice@globalmanagement.ca; 'Gerard Holmgren'; jfetzer@d.umn.edu; skyking@scientist.com; leland@33o.com; dylan@loosechange911.com; janicematthews@sbcglobal.net; babelmagazine@adelphia.net; sisyphus1285@cs.com; nicohaupt@gmx.li Cc: rayantoky@aol.com; mmorford@sfgate.com; cnn.onair@cnn.com; Paul@propagandamatrix.com; tips@infowars.com; comments@whitehouse.gov; Mruppert@copvcia.com; 'Rosalee Grable'; 'Richard Curtis su'; 'Gabbard, David A'; 'JOHNSMITH'; 'JimmyWalter'; 'Michael Morrissey'; 'Jones, Steven'; 'MorganReynolds'; apfn@apfn.net; judy.wood@ces.clemson.edu; cookb@ulv.edu; jeff_farrer@byu.edu; kevin@mujca.com; ADuncan282@aol.com; WDoyle5615@aol.com; email@unmask.dk; krsto.herenda@zd.hinet.hr; bollynkaskel@yahoo.com; rmerrill@mica.edu; MARCUS.FORD@NAU.EDU; ajohnson@cs.uic.edu; titus@pacific.net; HQ2600@aol.com; john_doeII@yahoo.de; editor@americanfreepress.net; mcginn@ohio.edu; serendipity@magnet.ch; chossudovsky@videotron.ca; webstertarpley@yahoo.com; wahinkpe@yahoo.com; jiri.kudelka@villusion.cz; wingedpiper@yahoo.com; lynnlandes@earthlink.net; mkeefer@uoguelph.ca; aauaplanes09112001whathappened@yahoo.co.uk; hcianci@txcc.commnet.edu; k-robjoe@online.no; editor@thetruthseeker.co.uk; Press@tvnewslies.org; mitchelcohen@mindspring.com; psychhst@tiac.net; kenvan@comcast.net; email@hbuecker.net; rmunro@clarku.edu; mkeefer@look.ca; duffy@HCI.NET; skylax@comcast.net; 'malaprop'; missilegate@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: Plane Hugging Party updates: '2nd hit'- camera identified as "military cam sys" Rob, it was actually Jim Fetzer who added you into this list, not me. I remove you, if you correct that we're analysing here sensicle facts. To claim that it is nonsensicle, is to continue your paradoxon of contradictive conclusions. If your butterbrain recovers some brain cells, let me know. Also if you like, i replace your "corporate" address with your private address or please ask Jim to do so for you, who abused your pseudo research for his pod obsession, which is based on the very same video analysis, you both refuse to address regarding my own findings/ nico Rob Rice wrote: Listen buddy, I said nothing other than remove me from this daisy chain list about a nonsensicle issue. I don't want to get into it. Just remove robrice@globalmanagement.ca from the list. This is my corporate email address, and these emails are very distracting. I don't want to debate it, or the logic of no planes vs. planes. Just please, remove me from all future emailings. Thank you. Rob Rice From: Nico Haupt [mailto:nicohaupt2@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 2:10 PM To: Nico Haupt; Gerard Holmgren; jfetzer@d.umn.edu; skyking@scientist.com; robrice@globalmanagement.ca; leland@33o.com; dylan@loosechange911.com; janicematthews@sbcglobal.net; babelmagazine@adelphia.net; sisyphus1285@cs.com; nicohaupt@gmx.li Cc: rayantoky@aol.com; mmorford@sfgate.com; cnn.onair@cnn.com; Paul@propagandamatrix.com; tips@infowars.com; comments@whitehouse.gov; Mruppert@copvcia.com; 'Rosalee Grable'; 'Richard Curtis su'; 'Gabbard, David A'; 'JOHNSMITH'; 'JimmyWalter'; 'Michael Morrissey'; 'Jones, Steven'; 'MorganReynolds'; apfn@apfn.net; judy.wood@ces.clemson.edu; cookb@ulv.edu; jeff_farrer@byu.edu; kevin@mujca.com; ADuncan282@aol.com; WDoyle5615@aol.com; email@unmask.dk; krsto.herenda@zd.hinet.hr; bollynkaskel@yahoo.com; rmerrill@mica.edu; MARCUS.FORD@NAU.EDU; ajohnson@cs.uic.edu; titus@pacific.net; HQ2600@aol.com; john_doeII@yahoo.de; editor@americanfreepress.net; mcginn@ohio.edu; serendipity@magnet.ch; chossudovsky@videotron.ca; webstertarpley@yahoo.com; wahinkpe@yahoo.com; jiri.kudelka@villusion.cz; wingedpiper@yahoo.com; lynnlandes@earthlink.net; mkeefer@uoguelph.ca; aauaplanes09112001whathappened@yahoo.co.uk; hcianci@txcc.commnet.edu; k-robjoe@online.no; editor@thetruthseeker.co.uk; Press@tvnewslies.org; mitchelcohen@mindspring.com; psychhst@tiac.net; kenvan@comcast.net; email@hbuecker.net; rmunro@clarku.edu; mkeefer@look.ca; duffy@HCI.NET; skylax@comcast.net; 'malaprop'; missilegate@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: 9/11 Plane Hugging Party updates: '2nd hit'- camera identified as "military cam sys" the butterbrain logic of Rob is even confusing me -:) Correctly it should say: "... Replace P also with "use video for existence of planes" and Q for "use video for existence of inserted planes" Nico Haupt wrote: Rob Rice wrote: "...Please remove me from this list in all future emailings. Thank you. This whole no plane bluescreen nonsense is an utter absurdity and a complete waste of time. I do not wish to see anything about it again. "Planehuggers"? That's rediculous. Please go away...." We just established that Rob implies, that this technology does not exist and still resists to respond on all findings at http://www.911close.up/nico Instead Rob, by denying to look into the footage, takes the very same video footage as the only evidence for existing commercial aircraft on sep11th. How is this logic plausible for a butterbrain of Rob? Rob is opposing the deductive logic of contradictions and violates it TWICE. First he is playing opposite eye-witness reports against each other and ignores the contradictive reports. Then he ignores visual and chronological evidence of the only available live footage, which was filmed with the military WESCAM (L-3) system. http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html Rob is producing a paradoxon. Contradiction is associated with several notorious paradoxes. One of these is that in first-order predicate calculus ANY proposition (aka statement) can be derived from a contradiction. In other words, according to the predicate calculus, no matter what P and Q mean, if P and not-P are both true, then Q is true. In _expression of this fact, contradictions are said to be "logically explosive" in first-order logic. Replace P with witness entity "saw planes", Q with witness enity "saw no planes, though i'm in front of the tower". Replace P also with "use video for existence of planes" and Q for "use video against existence of inserted planes" The brain cells of Rob are possibly damaged. He can be lucky that he is not a machine. It would tilt and give up after a while..... Nico Haupt wrote: (barbie@ruf.rice.edu removed, her university has not enough bandwidth she complained (phillipjayhan@yahoo.com removing after begging me 3 times 1:1. Phil has obviously nothing other productive to say to add into the pod mania than: "...take me off this email list. is all you guys do is argue and pile my email box up with your nonsense..." It's 3, 4 weeks later and still noone of the planehuggers has responded with an appropriate analysis of my findings at http://www.911close.up.com/nico I will come therefore to the conclusion, that there is nothing to dispute. Neither the biggest 9/11 truth 'speakers', 911truth.org or 9/11 scholars could refute anything, or the obscure "Salter Brothers" reappeared with one of their technical gibberish. Also, government shill "skyking" still chickens out and didn't address the militarized footage from 9/1 yet, instead escaping again into a 1:3 correspondence: "...Why don't you start a blog as a replacement for this e-mail list, Nico? That way we can make a fool of you, Rosalee, and Gerard in public to a far wider audience..." So why is skyking not starting to fool himself in a list of 40 people only? Meanwhile the latest findings had been updated at http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html Nico Haupt wrote: Phil Jayhan begged me to get removed from this list. Obviously he doesn't want to miseducate Jim Fetzer more on his pods. I will let him go, after everyone reads this below. Have a nice night :) W-ABC Camera Type Identification http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html CNN and FOX showing the same synched local feed from W-ABC (ABC7), by using a military camera system.... Identification of the W-ABC Camera System At around 9:08 AM EST, FOX TV goes back to the original W-ABC live camera (no 'tight shot' anymore), now showing for only 1 second, then suddenly zooming out again, the identification of the camera type: A "WESCAM". A "WESCAM" is a special anti-vibration camera that mounts on a helicopter and delivers some really stellar visuals. ... WESCAM is a military camera system The "WESCAM" was actually improved and integrated into the U.S. military, specificially as part of L-3 Communication: (Note: L-3 Communications was created in April, 1997 with the purchase of business units that were part of the Loral Corporation and Lockheed Martin merger in 1996).... more at http://www.911closeup.com/nico/WABC_cam_identification.html Nico Haupt wrote: In case Mark Morford's style wasn't filled with sarcasm, i will apologize ASAP to him. Let's see if he has some time for us -:) Nico Haupt wrote: Inviting Mark Morford to comment on his latest drivel at http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/archive/2006/03/29/notes032906.DTL&nl=fix Nico Haupt wrote: Government shill asset and Daisy committee member, DJ "skyking" is still chickening out from this party. Instead he's suggesting in his own mini-escape list, that Rosalee Grable used to have the same stun belt, like Moussaoui had last week. We're getting nothing productive out of any 'planehugger' ye. They remain on the level of insults and opposing all visual fakery facts from 9/11... "S. King" wrote: I'm curious, Rosalee, is that the same brand belt your handlers use on you? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rosalee Grable" To: "S. King" Subject: Re: A real party: Welcome Skyking :) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:35:02 -0600 Perhaps this pet troll has a stun belt around it like poor Moussari. http://news.google.com/news?q=Moussaoui+stun+belt to make it keep saying whatever crazy thing keeps the pain away. Nico Haupt wrote: As a reminder for Rob "condi-party line" Rice, i am indeed Charlie Sheen's biggest fan, since he's supporting our findings. The planehuggers have still not yet addressed his sharp comment from last week: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/ http://www.911closeup.com/nico/contradictions1.html TV fakery: The latest prominent 'no-planer' Charlie Sheen http://www.defamer.com/hollywood/charlie-sheen/charlie-sheen-talks-911-conspiracy-161961.php "...There was a feeling, it just didn't look any commercial jetliner I've flown on any time in my life..." http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/3/emw362500.htm&cid=1105351482 "....I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where it disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous fireball." well done, Charlie :) Nico Haupt wrote: Sorry, skyking, i forgot to attach the incomplete list of all forums this daisy committee attended or was represented with this handle in the last few months ... This list includes almost 450 addresses, where skyking was active debunking the so called 9/11 denial movement.... Nico Haupt wrote: (Still removing MPWright, because too off-topic) (adding CNN Showbiz, attempted contact no.1 at cnn.onair@cnn.com Please showbiz make sure that Sharon Stone is reading us ) (adding Paul@propagandamatrix.com aka Paul Joseph Watson, who hopefully makes sure, that Charlie Sheen will be invited here too) (adding 'planehugger' Alex Jones, who never responded to any 9/11 researcher personally in the last 4.6 years) (adding the White House, who should make sure, to send us Andrew Card's new email address, before he will clean his desk, to let him testify, if he whispered into Bush's ears, that the second fake plane arrived or on which assumtion he based his idea on alleged commercial aircrafts) (adding John Doe II, on his own request, as individual and very busy observer. John is also most active at team8plus.org) Welcome back to the party updates on 9/11- 'planehuggers' vs. so called 'no-planers' :) What's the latest on all 9/11 truthlings, gatekeepers and planehuggers who "discredited" this movement in the last 4.6 years? (...btw, this meme on "damaging the movement" was developed during 2002 by Jonathan and George Soros for Kyle "America is not ready for the truth" Hence, who since then inspired WING TV and other planehuggers to pick up the very same meme.) 1) Skyking@scientist.com ....operating as a US government shill or shill asset, is indeed running out of scripts right now, instead trying to escape by reducing the list. I re-added all missing names and will therefore show the names from the reduced list, where he first re-appeared: "Gerard Holmgren" , jfetzer@d.umn, Rosalee Grable'" , "'Nico Haupt'" , robrice@globalmanagement.ca, "'JimmyWalter'" , "'Jones, Steven'" , "'MorganReynolds'" , apfn@apfn.net, judy.wood@ces.clemson.edu, editor@americanfreepress.net, serendipity@magnet.ch, webstertarpley@yahoo.com Why he ignored all other names, is a mystery to me, but i re-welcome him back here as well. Skyking wrote: "...Thanks for your welcome, Nico. By all means, please keep 'us' on your mailing list. 'We're' doing our best to get you, Gerard, and Rosallee on Showbiz Tonight as an opposing viewpoints to the formidable 9/11 Truth expert, Charlie Sheen, and this documentation certainly helps argue in your favor. 'We' have many useful contacts in Hollywood, so expect to hear from someone in the near future. I appreciate the extrordinary effort and amount of time you are devoting to this effort. It truly shows. Most sincerely S. King & Co..." I hope, he's still working on that and also get Charlie Sheen back on the show, who turned into the latest noplaner, not addressed yet from all other WTC-'planehuggers'. (errm...exception: Good ole Dick Eastman yelled at Charlie. Well done, Dick. You did do your homework. At least Dick is an honest confronter on all details :) Skyking also still try to hide in this smaller list, where he just responded again: "...Yes, I addressed your silliness in full, Nico. That of Rosalee, too and, of course, Gerard who I first debunked in 2002 and dozens of times since. I am sure Rosalee is feeling particularly disgraced to have been so easily embarrassed by Moussari. It's the nature of the beast. Cheers S. King ..." 2) Mike Ruppert ...most famous planehugger (with obscure ex-wifes in the NYC area), as already predicted, is still ignoring his emails. Nothing changed in 4.6 years. He might be busy with other drivel somewhere else and we should enjoy that he didn't respond yet. Or maybe he's working on a new lawsuit against the complete list here :) 3) Janice Matthews ...unsurprisingly also Janice Matthews (911untruth.org), as usual, has nothing productive to add. We should enjoy this too :) 4) WING TV ...as predicted, are still too coward and censorship obsessed to speak out here. They might continue to questioning my 'friendship' with them and send me some english dictionaires, until they will be able to understand what i'm talking about. Lisa Guiliani however was busy at hardevidence list, to find 11 (!) witnesses in NYC and inspired list owner Mark Bilk (not invited here) to make a witness website, by ignoring the contradictive statements among these witnesses. I'm saying: Bring it on, Mark! 5) Ralph Omholt ...Pilot and planehugger at "hardevidence list", too overwhelmed with what i had to say over there and also no clue what i'm talking about. I don't need to invite him here. It's hopeless. 6) "Rob Rice" aka Omega Point aka headhuntr aka Rob (letsroll 911 -"pod forum") ...confused Skyking's reduced list here, therefore i have to respond on his posting here. Rob, i feel so sorry for you, that the US Government didn't put you on their official shill list yet, but i'm sure they enjoy your free volunteer service. Maybe you should take the opportunity to send your resume here in this list to Skyking@scientist.com . While we are here, skyking who's doing much better work than Rob Rice should provide us also with the email address from yet another US Government asset daisy committee aka LARED, most active at democraticunderground.com, since 4.6 years 24/7, without having revealed ever his real name or identity. I would like to invite LARED here too. So please 'skyking' do your best. I think, the truthlings in this list have the right to let the US Government know, what's the latest on their mind is and it's easier than to sniff in their email provider backbone backups :) For those who still don't know, who "skyking" is, attached with this partylist an impartial list of 450 forums over the last few months and years, where "he" showed up and still didn't explain to us yet, how "he" was able to do it. But back to Rob and his silly answer in skyking's mini list: "...I got an email about one Sky King, though I already deleted it. Just so everyone knows, he's an anti 9/11 truth movement shill. Becoming very suspiscious of the motives and intent of Holmgren, Haupt, and Grable also. Something's not right at all. It's a campaign to discredit the movement I firmly believe, and the entry of Sky King onto the scene, in support of them, only serves to confirm that suspicion. Regards, Rob Rice...." And here another silly note by Rob Rice (not related with Condoleeza Rice, i assume): "...Media Hoax? It was a hoax, but only in terms of the fake cause (plane strike and fire) of the near free fall collapse of the twin towers. You, Izzy (malaprop), Haupt and Holmgren are into a campaign of nonsense, who's aim may very well be to discredit the 9/11 truth movement. No wonder Sky King gets invited and certain people want you on CNN to counter Sheen and the issues he raises. Makes sense. Your strenuous efforts to insert the absurdity, and infect the egg before it fully hatches, is well noted by all..." Please notice, that Rob Rice is also influenced by the Soros/Hence meme of "discredit(ing) the 9/11 truth movement..." 7) Phil Jayhan ...obviously too busy at letstroll911 too brainwash Jim Fetzer into the latest pod supporter :) i will be right back, get some fresh popcorn and still waiting here for a new response by "skyking" Nico Haupt wrote: I have to re-join this party until after 7PM, because to busy at my office job. Meanwhile i invite Ray Antoky, a respected visitor of the 9/11 meetups, who also had been responsible for the excellent job at wikipedia. Welcome to this party :) Nico Haupt wrote: We also established, that in at least one case, a mistake wasn't corrected in the back buffer in time, though this video wasn't even shown between 8:45 AM and 10:45 AM: http://911closeup.com/nico/ You see that the CGI had been rotated by an unknown entity to hide particular details. We also established, that no conventional airpilot or remote controlled technology is able to rotate a commercial aircraft in this way: http://911closeup.com/nico/nico-closeup.htm We also established, that this detail was not addressed by the so called planehuggers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planehugger Planehugger is a recent political neologism that has been used on the World Wide Web frequently in newsgroups and blogs. The term refers to those people in the 9/11 Truth Movement who believe that real, full size commercial passenger jets or planes were used in the 9/11 event. There have been many serious researchers questioning the official account of 9/11 in the Truth Movement who feel they have proven that a real, commercial jet was not used at the Pentagon explosion nor were real passenger jets used at the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. They make what they believe to be a credible case of inserted animation video (Computer-generated imagery)[[1]] combined with military grade projections possibly cloaking missiles and therefore refer to those in the 9/11 Truth Movement who cling to the original 'official story' as huggers of planes or planehuggers since they seem to be in love with the original story as delivered by the mass media of commercial jets being used and refuse to alter their thinking regardless of new analysis of evidence.[[2]] The term is used somewhat derisively and sometimes linked to the concept of these 'planehuggers' being disinformation agents. While some like to refer to these research people as espousers of 9/11 conspiracy theories, these researchers are merely presenting alternative hypotheses to the official government story[3]which is in itself by definition a conspiracy theory . For further research please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Alternative_theories_of_September_11%2C_2001_attacks. Nico Haupt wrote: Since i can't correct my typos in time, for public events or public online forums, where i am not invited anymore, i have to apologize for harrassing this group, by correcting another word. It is correctly Computer-generated-imagery: When an image is rendered to the screen or vector-keyed as seen on the W-ABC video, it is normally rendered to something called a back buffer. There the Computer can draw the image, making any necessary changes to it before it is done. While the Computer is doing this, the screen is showing the contents of what is called the primary or active buffer. When the image is completed, the Computer tells the screen to draw from the back buffer. Since we established that the W-ABC footage was shown with a delay of 4-7 seconds there was enough time to deal with this back buffer. It was also the only footage live available, as also synched into the CNN broadcast (and others) 10 seconds before (!) the alleged commercial aircraft appeared as a black blurb from the right side. Since people in this forum think, they have to talk with Rosalee Grable or Gerard Holmgren first instead of me, who created this list in the first place, i will correct as much as possible, until anyone in this list addresses correctly MY findings. This includes also the achievement of having convinced several people in this movement, including Jimmy Walter and covertoperations.blogpsot.com to be supportive of our case. It is also possible, that Rosalee Grable and Gerard Holmgren are a) too busy to show up here again and instead hang out at the much more serious forum of 911Scholars b) pissed off that i invited skyking Therefore you guys have possibly to deal with ME only. Sorry for any inconvenience. Nico Haupt wrote: Correction: "....'CGIs'= computer generated videos..." corrected into computer generated inserts, uploaded via vector-keying, as seen in the W-ABC footage. Nico Haupt wrote: Everyone, so far we have established on this "party", that this group is not able to meet together on either a public- or online undisclosed and open sourced forum. Instead the group prefers to celebrate in the style of 1994: Via gibberish email lists. Since the group also ignored how to set up fileserv or releted tools, i have therefore to aplogozie to continue this conservative way. We also established that WING TV, especially Lisa Giuiliani prefers a) to support the so called "eyewitness entity" to make her point, that commercial aircraft hit the South Tower and therefore is using a contradictive entities. I just posted, as i did several times before, other witness accounts, which nullify this entity as taking for serious to make all our own points b) to talk with someone who is able to communicate in proper emglish c) to be a coward and not to show up in THIS list here d) siding with the official story Let us therefore concentrate on skyking and open the floor for him. It was established, that Skyking a) does not support that controlled demolition in the towers took place b) believes, that if videos show commercial aircraft it must have been commercial aircraft c) chickening out when asked on the analysis on this second hit footage at sf.indymedia: http://www.911closeup.com/nico/SKYKING_sf_TVdebate.txt "...One doesn't need ANY videos to know that WTC 1 & 2 were each hit by Boeing 767s..." d) skyking also claimed "thousands of witnesses" , a reckless claim which cannot be substantiated. e) with the ability of showing up at 450 forums worldwide, occasionally also at the same time, skyking must be either part of a daisy committee, most obviously also run by US Intelligence, but at least supporting the US Intelligence line as also the official story e) WING TV supports same non-communicating style and ignorance of video analysis as government operatives or helpful idiots who appear to be most logical government assets. We also established, that Mike Ruppert is, as usual, not checking any of his emails. Let's ignore him therefore too. As Skyking pointed out at sf.indymedia, after he was able to censor and ban Gerard Holmgren, we also established that the so called planehuggers work with censorship f) WING TV's word is nothing worth anymore, since they claimed some weeks ago, they would give "everyone the benefit of a doubt", but since then remained in silence, also ignored the reporting of Charlie Sheen, the latest no-planer: http://www.defamer.com/hollywood/charlie-sheen/charlie-sheen-talks-911-conspiracy-161961.php "...There was a feeling, it just didn't look any commercial jetliner I've flown on any time in my life..." http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/3/emw362500.htm&cid=1105351482 "....I saw the south tower hit live, that famous wide shot where it disappears behind the building and then we see the tremendous fireball." WING TV also ignored this promise, by pointing out on monday, that http://www.wingtv.net/thorn2006/911action.html "...we’re still discussing pods, blue-screens, and the absurd notion that NO flying aircraft struck the WTC towers..." However that's exactly what WING TV does not. They're not discussing "blue-screens" (here corrected from me with 'CGIs'= computer generated videos) They also seem to be very supportive of the 911Scholars, though Jim Fetzer just turned into the very same 'pod people', WING TV allegedly complained about. Let's ignore WING TV therefore too. Contradictive journalism isn't journalism at all, censorship journalism isn't journalism at all. WING TV shows that they follow exactly this line and also support activist events for sep1th, 2006, by fading out that we're actually facing WW4/5 between US, China and Russia. WING TV also support false-hope campaigns of requesting video footage from the Pentagon, though we established now since 4.6 years, how easily video footage can be faked, especially if it is not broadcasted live. I would like to have some clarity from Skyking now, as to whether he's not able to address video footage. Nico Haupt wrote: > Von: Mark S Bilk > An: hardevidence@cosmicpenguin.com > Betreff: Re: [HardEvidence]Photo: Eyewitness to South Tower Plane Impact > Datum: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 02:55:07 -0800 > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 01:53:37AM -0800, Lisa Guliani wrote: > >Please see attached photo and read caption below it. > > > >Lisa Guliani > >WING TV > > Thanks, Lisa! > > According to the Webfairy-Holmgren gang, the woman > in that photo must be a government agent! According to Mark Bilk, the following people must be government agents: 1) http://culhavoc.blogsome.com/2006/03/10/nicos-timeline-cnns-reality-tv-hoax/ "...I have witnessed a horrible history. I was supposed to go to NJ for a seminar. I was on the BQE bridge going into Chinatown, Manhattan, when I saw an explosion at exactly 8:48am on the first Twin Tower. The radio said that it was a plane accident. I immediately called my sister in NJ, who normally has to get to the World Trade Center station (she works for the Mayor's office, 4 blocks away from WTC). I told her that there has been an accident and told her to avoid that station. She said that my brother will drive her to Manhattan instead. I then placed another phone call telling my best friend to stay away from the area. My friend has jury duty and the Supreme Court is 3 blocks away. Suddenly, I saw a second explosion but did not see the plane. http://www.geocities.com/vnwomensforum/september11debate.html (NOTE: BQE Bridge is local slang for Brooklyn Queens Express running over the Williamsborough Bridhe) 2) http://www.panix.com/userdirs/timothy/wtc.html "...We all looked up at the WTC to see one tower on fire. There was a ring of fire encircling the building one floor...near the top. The floors above the ring were enshrouded in thick black upwardly rising waves. Every second or two the fire crept lower--floor by floor---dripping like wax down a candle. The thought of those people...they're being incinerated..there's no way to control that fire. Then a huge fireball--monstrous in size--shot out and up---like some horribly visible dragon's breath.(this was the fireball from the impact of the second jet--I didn't realize this until after viewing the footage of the attack)..." 3) http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?ID=4318 http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0110/images/m04.jpg "...Then out of nowhere came this noise. This loud, high-pitched roar that seemed to come from all over, but from nowhere in particular. AND THE SECOND TOWER JUST EXPLODED. It became amazingly obvious to anyone there that what we all had hoped was a terrible accident was actually an overt act of hostility. I DIDN'T SEE THE PLANE HIT,ALTHOUGH I WAS LOOKING AT THE TOWER AT THE TIME. I have no recollection of pushing the button, hitting the shutter, making the picture that appeared on Page 2 of the Daily News the next day, a picture that was taken milliseconds after the second plane hit that tower..." 4) http://www.bbc.co.uk/tyne/have_your_say/september_11.shtml ... Gemma McDonald, Houston, Texas: On the morning of September 11. I was getting ready to go to school, when the news station broke in with breaking news. They said a plane had hit the world trade center. They were in the middle of broadcasting that story live, whenever a big fireball appeared out of the other tower. In order to see what hit the tower. They had to replay the tape in slow motion. We didn't know what had happened because we didn't see the plane, because it was so fast. Whenever I did figure out what happened I got this weird feeling across my body that I can't describe..." 5) TV'"witness": http://www.vegasgangonline.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7574&page=2 "...stood there watching the coverage in the airport until my flight was called. I saw the explosion in the second tower and thought it was because of the first tower burning as I didn't see the plane hit. My flight was called about 9:20 and I boarded the plane, we all sat there until about 9:35 when the pilot announced taht all flights were cancelled. After I got of the plane I went back to the TV and saw what was going on.." 6) Hispano amateur cameraman, who didn't see any object hitting south tower, while filming both towers: http://www.cruzate.com/nyhell/3.jpg Compare with same geograpical position of towers aT Rosalee's site (Antenna is in the back of second= north tower) http://www.webfairy.org/2hit/blueplane.htm http://www.cruzate.com/nyhell "...When I was back in the roof I saw just before my eyes the explosion on Tower 2. I didn't see the plane, nor did any of the other guys on the roof. We speculated for a few minutes. The only thing we could imagine was on of the wings of the first plane hitting the other tower and provoking the explosion, but that was very unlikely...." 7) From an amateur camera clip, camera positioned on both towers: "...we just saw another explosion (TV comment)...." Person 1 in room: "...Another explosion Kate..." Kate: "...i know, i know..." (noone of both refered to any plane) http://www.911closeup.com/nico/day1-tower2-fireball-only.wmv 8) Don Dahler vs. ABC Dahler: ...i didn't see any plane going in...that...that's just exploded...i... Gibson: We just saw another plane coming in from the side. Dahler: You did?? I...that was ..was...out of my view... Gibson: That was a second explosion. You can see the plane come in just from the right hand side of the screen... (=> Dahler's witness report 'overruled' by a TV monitor) http://thewebfairy.com/911/haarp/reporter.didnt.see.plane.wmv 9) Witness Reporter Winston on NBC, which had same synched W-ABC clip: the "building is exploding right now" The studio host doesn't even see his monitor where the same W-ABC footage shows same black flying object vanishing behind first tower, then followed by explosion and fireball (no sound). The studio host agrees with street reporter (who didn't report any incoming 'plane', that this explosion must have been forced from 'parts of the first plane..." http://www.911closeup.com/nico/msnbc_2ndCGIplane_wrongtower_touch.mpg http://www.911closeup.com/nico/CGIplane_touches_northtower.jpg (RENDERING UPLOAD MISTAKE) 10) http://thewebfairy.com/911/bombs/ Witness: NO second plane, it was a bomb.... FOX clip Reporter is whisking witness away: "we heard about tv reports..." Lisa wrote: > --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --- > Von: Lisa Guliani > An: hardevidence@cosmicpenguin.com > Betreff: [HardEvidence]Photo: Eyewitness to South Tower Plane Impact > Datum: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 01:53:37 -0800 (PST) > > What is with Suzanne Dechilio? I don't understand this point. btw, this seems to be in Williamsburgh, where i also watched the towers for a while... > Please see attached photo and read caption below it. > > Lisa Guliani > WING TV Nico Haupt wrote: Skyking, thanks so much for your efforts in Hollywood. I really appreciate that - :) Nico Haupt wrote: this party is kinda boring inviting Mruppert@copvcia.com now "S. King" wrote (and removed many): Thanks for your welcome, Nico. By all means, please keep 'us' on your mailing list. 'We're' doing our best to get you, Gerard, and Rosallee on Showbiz Tonight as an opposing viewpoints to the formidable 9/11 Truth expert, Charlie Sheen, and this documentation certainly helps argue in your favor. 'We' have many useful contacts in Hollywood, so expect to hear from someone in the near future. I appreciate the extrordinary effort and amount of time you are devoting to this effort. It truly shows. Most sincerely S. King & Co. Nico Haupt wrote: removing rumourmillnews because of bouncing harrassment repinging skyking Nico Haupt wrote: quoting: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Rice" Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 10:58 PM Subject: RE: back to that damned question > > Here is my LAST response > > http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/EmailNews26Mar2006.html > > That is how the plane suddenly stopped after penetrating through the > .25" > thick outer perimeter steel beam framework, and yes, getting smashed > and > crushed and mangled by the floor pans and other interior > structures - it ran > into a detonation and then itself detonated, filling the volume of > space > within the building and ejecting through the holes punched out, both > as a > result of a warhead detonation, and by preplanted explosive charges. > > It was a remotely piloted drone aircraft, a real one, almost > certainly a > Tanker Transport, the technology which was in place by that time, > and thus, > a prototype could easily have been produced, and then shell gamed by > none > other than the Pentagon Controller Dov Zakheim. Perle and Kissinger > were > also involved in the Tanker deal, which might have had something to > do with > it. > > Your no planes theory is utterly absurd and must be discarded in > favour of > new information. There are a growing number myself among them who > believe > that the disinfo could very well serve to discredit the movement to > some > degree. In other words, what you are doing is NOT HELPFUL, to the > cause of > truth, and justice, if only historical justice, by setting the > historical > record STRAIGHT and TRUE! > > RR > You put that so tactfully. Your theory is dependent on several pieces of speculation--i.e. remote controlled---a fuel tanker--you add Kissenger and Perle--to what purpose ? To impress, perhaps? Since I was the one who supplied the info and photo on DU rods appearances and sizes to Letsroll in the first place, back when I still thought the pod was real, and the plane, as odd as it looks, was a real aircraft, I'm very interested in what this new information is that you have that makes the no plane EVIDENCE null and void, and What is the new information that you speak of? I notice you still claim the POSSIBILITY that it was a tanker---you have of course, checked on what speed a full tanker is capable of at sea level............ and I'm sure you've checked on what model this was, and have some way of proving it matches? You'd better because there is no known aircraft that matches what we see in the video clips. And of course there is the ever familiar suggestion that anyone that doesn't agree with you is a threat to the entire 911 movement, and further, anyone not in agreement with the pod is disinfo.......I always love that sort of logic..... Nico Haupt wrote: adding nicohaupt@gmx.li, removing nicohaupt2@yahoo.com (no.2) removing 'PlaguePuppy' adding phillipjayhan@yahoo.com adding dylan@loosechange911.com adding janicematthews@sbcglobal.net hijacking arbie@ruf.rice.edu repositioning WING TV announcing jwalter@reopen911.org to have been hacked removing MPWright9@aol.com Nico Haupt wrote: Reinviting jfetzer@d.umn.edu after typo Nico Haupt wrote: skyking@scientist.com, since you are monitoring everyone of us anyway, i expected a quicker "hello, thanks for this invitation, but i don't know why i should waste time with you guys". I'm disappointed. Is your script running out? Wasn't it you, who said, since Moussaoui's new outing the denial 9/11 truth movement is dead and the no-plane thesis died as well??? keep me updated, Sky you don't like our party? Nico Haupt wrote: Everyone, why not having a real party now? :) I happy to announce my latest cyber buddy, skyking, the only official cyberspook only in this truthling movement, closely linked to other government daisy commitees as "LARED" and co. The invention of "skyking" is able to appear on 450 forums worldwide. Congratulations to this NSA phenomena: http://911closeup.com/nico/SKYKING_sf_TVdebate.txt Let's give a clap to skyking@ and his bot buddies Let's also start from scratch again... Where were we?? :) PS: Meanwhile other characters should go this other ezboard forum, where skyking is not allowed to log in.... Gerard Holmgren wrote: Jim Fetzer wrote [[But it is pointless to go on. I have said my piece. I knew full well that a man of this level of egomania would not let go. The positions these three represent are fantasies of their own devising. Please take me off the list. ]] No Jim, you will not be released from this list until you either a) directly the engage the argument below or b) Clearly and unequivocally admit that you have no counter argument. Here it is again. Here are Eastman's claims (summarized). a) The plane punched easily through the outer wall, making a cartoon cut out of itself, but was then stopped by the core of the building, which was too strong for it. b) That while this was happening, one of the engines burst through the wall, missed the core, and then came out the other side. Here is my response. Let's lay to rest this silly idea from Eastman about an engine flying through the building and missing the core to come out the other side. Let's see some photos of the tower damage, and let's see a plane hugger's view of the mythical plane superimposed upon the damage. For this I have chosen the darling of the plane huggers, Eric Salter, who has done more to accidentally provide us with proof of no planes than any other plane hugger. He does so again here, by kindly illustrating my point with the photos at http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/767orwhatzit.html Scroll about 40% of the way down the page until you see the photos of the hole in the building with the mythical plane superimposed. Note the position of the engines. Now note the following figures. The Buildings were 208 ft x 208. The core was 79 by 139. To give the plane theory a better chance, lets assume that the width of the core facing us in the photo is the smaller - 79 ft. That's 38 % of the width of the building. So, draw a line down the middle of the building and then from that middle point, the core extends 38% of the way to each extremity of the building. Now look at where the engines are positioned, on the assumption that the cutout shape represents where the plane went in. Does either engine fall to the outside of that 38 % ? Of course, if the longer width of core were to be facing us - 139 ft - then this covers 66.8 % of the building so that makes the situation even worse. This of course, will cause the plane huggers to fly into a panic and assert that it's the shorter width of core facing us, and if they squint hard enough at it, and fudge the figures enough, that one of the engines might just fall outside the 38 % line. Well, even if it did, that means that the shorter core width - 79 ft - is facing us, which means that the longer core - 139 ft is pointing towards us - meaning that the plane penetrated just 34.5 ft of the building before [[the plane was stopped by the core]] That leaves 125.5 ft of plane still outside the building when [[the plane was stopped by the core]]. So even the wing roots were about 45 ft from the building when [[the plane was stopped by the core]] Which means that the engines were over 50 ft from the building when [[the plane was stopped by the core]]. Which means that the outer sections of the wings were something like 80 ft from the building when [[the plane was stopped by the core]] And the tail was 125 ft from the building when [[the plane was stopped by the core ]] So, I'm wondering, a) how the wings and tail and engines even got to the building at all, let alone with enough velocity to punch a nice neat shape of themselves, since "stopped" means to cease motion. b) How the engine, after somehow managing to fly off the wing which never made it to the building, somehow managed to steer itself around the core ? -----Original Message----- From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu [mailto:jfetzer@d.umn.edu] Sent: Tuesday, 28 March 2006 9:14 AM To: Gerard Holmgren; jfetzer@d.umn.edu Cc: 'Rosalee Grable'; 'Nico Haupt'; robrice@globalmanagement.ca; 'Richard Curtis su'; 'Gabbard, David A'; 'JOHNSMITH'; 'JimmyWalter'; 'Michael Morrissey'; 'Jones, Steven'; 'MorganReynolds'; apfn@apfn.net; judy.wood@ces.clemson.edu; cookb@ulv.edu; jeff_farrer@byu.edu; kevin@mujca.com; ADuncan282@aol.com; WDoyle5615@aol.com; email@unmask.dk; babelmagazine@adelphia.net; krsto.herenda@zd.hinet.hr; bollynkaskel@yahoo.com; rmerrill@mica.edu; MPWright9@aol.com; MARCUS.FORD@NAU.EDU; ajohnson@cs.uic.edu; titus@pacific.net; HQ2600@aol.com; editor@americanfreepress.net; mcginn@ohio.edu; serendipity@magnet.ch; chossudovsky@videotron.ca; webstertarpley@yahoo.com; wahinkpe@yahoo.com; jiri.kudelka@villusion.cz; 'PlaguePuppy'; wingedpiper@yahoo.com; lynnlandes@earthlink.net; mkeefer@uoguelph.ca; aauaplanes09112001whathappened@yahoo.co.uk; hcianci@txcc.commnet.edu; k-robjoe@online.no; editor@thetruthseeker.co.uk; barbie@ruf.rice.edu; Press@tvnewslies.org; contact@rumormillnews.com; mitchelcohen@mindspring.com; psychhst@tiac.net; kenvan@comcast.net; email@hbuecker.net; rmunro@clarku.edu; mkeefer@look.ca; duffy@HCI.NET; skylax@comcast.net; 'malaprop'; missilegate@yahoogroups.com Subject: It's been real! All, But it is pointless to go on. I have said my piece. I knew full well that a man of this level of egomania would not let go. The positions these three represent are fantasies of their own devising. Please take me off the list. JHF Quoting Gerard Holmgren : > Fetzer has employed the standard smoke throwing technique in forcing me to > correct so many libelous attributions to myself , WF and Morgan, that he's > hoping that the necessity to correct these libelous attributions will > distract from the argument which he desperately does not want to address. > > He insulted this list by repeatedly lying to it, and refusing to engage in > direct debate with the material which was presented. The idea is to discuss > arguments , not avoid them and lie about them. > > I addressed in detail his post from Robert Rice. Now Fetzer will address > mine. > > So Although I have already posted it twice, it is necessary for me to post > it again. Every time Fetzer tries to distract from this argument by forcing > me to correct misattributions to out work, then after correcting the > misattributions, I will post this again. > > I will continue to do so until Fetzer either directly engages the content of > the post below, or else openly states that he refuses to do so. > > Here again is what Fetzer is running from. It was written in the context of > a reply to Eastman, but is entirely relevant to what is under dispute. > > Here are Eastman's claims (summarized). > > a) The plane punched easily through the outer wall, making a cartoon cut > out of itself, but was then stopped by the core of the building, which was > too strong for it. > > b) That while this was happening, one of the engines burst through the > wall, missed the core, and then came out the other side. > > Here is my response. > > Let's lay to rest this silly idea from Eastman about an engine flying > through the building and missing the core to come out the other side. > > Let's see some photos of the tower damage, and let's see a plane hugger's > view of the mythical plane superimposed upon the damage. > > For this I have chosen the darling of the plane huggers, Eric Salter, who > has done more to accidentally provide us with proof of no planes than any > other plane hugger. > > He does so again here, by kindly illustrating my point with the photos at > > http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/767orwhatzit.html > > Scroll about 40% of the way down the page until you see the photos of the > hole in the building with the mythical plane superimposed. > > Note the position of the engines. Now note the following figures. > > The Buildings were 208 ft x 208. The core was 79 by 139. > > To give the plane theory a better chance, lets assume that the width of > the core facing us in the photo is the smaller - 79 ft. > > That's 38 % of the width of the building. > > So, draw a line down the middle of the building and then from that middle > point, the core extends 38% of the way to each extremity of the building. > > Now look at where the engines are positioned, on the assumption that the > cutout shape represents where the plane went in. > > Does either engine fall to the outside of that 38 % ? > > Of course, if the longer width of core were to be facing us - 139 ft - then > this covers 66.8 % of the building so that makes the situation even worse. > > This of course, will cause the plane huggers to fly into a panic and assert > that it's the shorter width of core facing us, and if they squint hard > enough at it, and fudge the figures enough, that one of the engines might > just fall outside the 38 % line. > > Well, even if it did, that means that the shorter core width - 79 ft - is > facing us, which means that the longer core - 139 ft is pointing towards us > - meaning that the plane penetrated just 34.5 ft of the building before > [[the plane was stopped by the core]] > > That leaves 125.5 ft of plane still outside the building when [[the plane > was stopped by the core]]. > > So even the wing roots were about 45 ft from the building when [[the plane > was stopped by the core]] > > Which means that the engines were over 50 ft from the building when [[the > plane was stopped by the core]]. > > Which means that the outer sections of the wings were something like 80 ft > from the building when [[the plane was stopped by the core]] > > And the tail was 125 ft from the building when [[the plane was stopped by > the core ]] > > So, I'm wondering, > > a) how the wings and tail and engines even got to the building at > all, let alone with enough velocity to punch a nice neat shape of > themselves, since "stopped" means to cease motion. > > b) How the engine, after somehow managing to fly off the wing which > never made it to the building, somehow managed to steer itself around the > core ? >